[Abortion Thread] (YET ANOTHER POLL!) Taking measure.

[The Caleshan Valkyrie]

Empathy.

You do realize there are pro-life women right?

Irrelevant to the point.

[Telconi]

Who said that? I didn't.

That's my point.

So your point is that a position I don't hold I apparently hold?

[Telconi]

You do realize there are pro-life women right?

Irrelevant to the point.

If the point is that pro-life people must experience pregnancy to feel empathy, the presence of pro-life women, many of whom have experienced pregnancy is pretty relevant.

[Indo-Malaysia]

So because I made a harmless joke on what I typically think of when I see the words 'self defence', I am a misogynist?

Funny story.

Because in your own ignorance and decided lack of empathy, you made what you think to be a ‘harmless joke’ but is very much an indicator of how much you do not care for what the woman thinks on the matter.

ANY unwanted contact is a harm. It need not be a punch or a kick. It can be a simple as putting your hand on her shoulder when she does not want that contact. Granted in that situation she can just brush your hand away and say ‘don’t touch me’, but what of rape? We’ve stated that in functional terms rape and an unwanted pregnancy are equivalent, in that the woman’s body is being used without her consent.

And you ‘chuckle’.

Yes. Funny story.

It wasn't the subject matter, just the way it was worded. Chill your beans and stop making a mountain ou of a molehill.

[Genivaria]

That's my point.

So your point is that a position I don't hold I apparently hold?

My point is that you find the actual pregnancy of the women in question not worthy of mentioning, because you failed. to. mention. it.
Right after Kat's comment about men having to carry the fetus.

[Katganistan]

Overturning Roe wouldn't be a bad thing but there should be a better way to do that.

Why? What possible advantage is there to wresting control of a woman's body from her?

They don't even understand the implications of overturning Roe v. Wade.

The decision was basically, "It's no one's business what medical decisions a person and their doctor make."

Let's open that Pandora's box, and deny all SORTS of things -- let's deny erectile dysfunction treatments on the basis that erections are not necessary and the lack of them won't kill you.

Why should I have to pay for people's penes on MY health insurance plan? I don't have one!

[Genivaria]

Irrelevant to the point.

If the point is that pro-life people must experience pregnancy to feel empathy, the presence of pro-life women, many of whom have experienced pregnancy is pretty relevant.

The point being that MEN have never experienced pregnancy and 9 times out of 10 don't have a clue what they're talking about on the subject.
Nice try building another strawman though.

[The Caleshan Valkyrie]

That's my point.

So your point is that a position I don't hold I apparently hold?

No, their point was that you just ignored all the hardships that come with a pregnancy in your adoption comment, as if ‘adoption’ magically sweeps such concerns away.

I particularly enjoy the fact that ‘it isn’t worth mentioning’ was responded to with ‘I didn’t say that!’

Very apropos.

[Telconi]

Why? What possible advantage is there to wresting control of a woman's body from her?

They don't even understand the implications of overturning Roe v. Wade.

The decision was basically, "It's no one's business what medical decisions a person and their doctor make."

Let's open that Pandora's box, and deny all SORTS of things -- let's deny erectile dysfunction treatments on the basis that erections are not necessary and the lack of them won't kill you.

Why should I have to pay for people's penes on MY health insurance plan? I don't have one!

Are you intentionally supporting this or ... ?

[Katganistan]

What if I don't believe in God?

Even if he exists, the sort of guy who builds an universe in six days would be intelligent enough not to think a lump of cells is a human.

If you don't believe in God it doesn't really matter. But the Bible does say that God creates each fetus as a person.

Where, exactly?

[The Caleshan Valkyrie]

Because in your own ignorance and decided lack of empathy, you made what you think to be a ‘harmless joke’ but is very much an indicator of how much you do not care for what the woman thinks on the matter.

ANY unwanted contact is a harm. It need not be a punch or a kick. It can be a simple as putting your hand on her shoulder when she does not want that contact. Granted in that situation she can just brush your hand away and say ‘don’t touch me’, but what of rape? We’ve stated that in functional terms rape and an unwanted pregnancy are equivalent, in that the woman’s body is being used without her consent.

And you ‘chuckle’.

Yes. Funny story.

It wasn't the subject matter, just the way it was worded. Chill your beans and stop making a mountain ou of a molehill.

Or you could maybe develop some empathy on the matter. I suggest making room in your self-righteous indignation.

A woman’s body being violated is no laughing matter. It is not for the woman, and it should not be for you.

[New haven america]

^this post is why.
Because apparently the 9 months where the woman's body is drastically altered, her immune system is weakened, and could possibly fucking die just isn't worthy of mentioning.

Who said that? I didn't.

Then why did you never mention it?

Also a list of health problem caused by pregnancy: Weight gain, mood swings, hormonal issues, nausea, soreness and swelling in the joints and breasts, and an overall decreased quality of life. After pregnancy you have: Lack of bladder control, postpartum depression, blood pressure problems, gestational diabetes, bone density issues, cancer, etc...

[Telconi]

So your point is that a position I don't hold I apparently hold?

No, their point was that you just ignored all the hardships that come with a pregnancy in your adoption comment, as if ‘adoption’ magically sweeps such concerns away.

I particularly enjoy the fact that ‘it isn’t worth mentioning’ was responded to with ‘I didn’t say that!’

Very apropos.

It's not ignoring a hardship to point out that the hardship isn't worth killing over.

[Katganistan]

Where? Where does the Bible say that God gives a fetus personhood?

They didn't have abortion, at least not in our capacity.

They absolutely, positively did.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/abortion/le ... ry_1.shtml

Here, I'll cut to the chase:

Abortion in ancient history
Ancient Greece and Rome
1st-century Roman couple depicted in a wall painting, the woman holding a stylus and the man a scroll Roman couple; 1st-century fresco from Pompeii ©

Abortion was accepted in both ancient Rome and Greece.

The Romans and Greeks weren't much concerned with protecting the unborn, and when they did object to abortion it was often because the father didn't want to be deprived of a child that he felt entitled to.

The early philosophers also argued that a foetus did not become formed and begin to live until at least 40 days after conception for a male, and around 80 days for a female.

If you're going to state something, please know what you're talking about.

[The Caleshan Valkyrie]

Irrelevant to the point.

If the point is that pro-life people must experience pregnancy to feel empathy...

Which it wasn’t. Gratz on reading comp.

It was on whether MEN experiencing pregnancy in all its gory glory would change their tune on the matter.

[The Caleshan Valkyrie]

No, their point was that you just ignored all the hardships that come with a pregnancy in your adoption comment, as if ‘adoption’ magically sweeps such concerns away.

I particularly enjoy the fact that ‘it isn’t worth mentioning’ was responded to with ‘I didn’t say that!’

Very apropos.

It's not ignoring a hardship to point out that the hardship isn't worth killing over.

‘Trespassers will be shot’

[Hrythingia]

Abortion is only permissible if the mother's life can be expected to be lost with the delivery. Anything else is murder.

[Napkiraly]

Why? What possible advantage is there to wresting control of a woman's body from her?

They don't even understand the implications of overturning Roe v. Wade.

The decision was basically, "It's no one's business what medical decisions a person and their doctor make."

Let's open that Pandora's box, and deny all SORTS of things -- let's deny erectile dysfunction treatments on the basis that erections are not necessary and the lack of them won't kill you.

Why should I have to pay for people's penes on MY health insurance plan? I don't have one!

Imagine making an argument this weak.

[Indo-Malaysia]

It wasn't the subject matter, just the way it was worded. Chill your beans and stop making a mountain ou of a molehill.

Or you could maybe develop some empathy on the matter. I suggest making room in your self-righteous indignation.

A woman’s body being violated is no laughing matter. It is not for the woman, and it should not be for you.

It's not my fault instead of wording it as something like '??? can abort because of ??? reasons', you written it like '??? can get rid of the baby out of self-defence'. It just sounds really exaggerated when you read it. It implies the baby is going out of its way to attack its host, which shouldnt be the case.
The women's body wasn't even mentioned. The whole post was about the way it was worded

Stop trying to pick a fight.

[Katganistan]

The fetus’ presence (if not consented to) inherently presents a violation of the woman’s bodily integrity. She is and should be afforded the right to remedy that issue with immediacy and effect, and using whatever means are necessary.

So because you do not want the baby, it is okay to kill it at any given time, yes?

Clearly not. Go read the rest of the thread rather than make the same lame arguments others have made. Go, before you make some crack about drowning a kid after birth (which by the way is murder: infanticide.)

[The Caleshan Valkyrie]

Abortion is only permissible if the mother's life can be expected to be lost with the delivery. Anything else is murder.

Only the delivery, huh?

Ectopic pregnancies be damned! she’ll just have to wait!

[New haven america]

The fetus’ presence (if not consented to) inherently presents a violation of the woman’s bodily integrity. She is and should be afforded the right to remedy that issue with immediacy and effect, and using whatever means are necessary.

So because you do not want the baby, it is okay to kill it at any given time, yes?

Someone hasn't been keeping up with the thread...

[Genivaria]

If the point is that pro-life people must experience pregnancy to feel empathy...

Which it wasn’t. Gratz on reading comp.

It was on whether MEN experiencing pregnancy in all its gory glory would change their tune on the matter.

I do STRONGLY believe that SOME men should have strong input on the matter of abortions and pregnancies.
That is to say male doctors, specifically male doctors working with pregnant women along with her input, and that's all the people who should be involved in the decision, the woman in question (because it's her body, her future baby, and her health), and the doctors who are the relevant experts.
Politicians, priests, and others who have no relevance at all to the situation can kindly fuck off.

[Telconi]

It's not ignoring a hardship to point out that the hardship isn't worth killing over.

‘Trespassers will be shot’

I must have missed how that's an argument...

[Katganistan]

*Fetus. And nope, we won't be baited that easily; there are clear and justified limits on late-term abortions.

And what differentiates a more developed baby than a less developed baby? Why should one deserve no protection, and the other is granted such?

"Born"
"Not Born"

One of these things is not like the other, one of these things doesn't belong.... Can you tell which thing is not like the others by the time I finish my song?